1 Summary of the Fourth Annual Workshop and Open

SUMMARY OF THE FOURTH ANNUAL WORKSHOP AND OPEN SYMPOSIUM ON SERVICE SYSTEMS SCIENCE AT TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Kyoichi Kijima, Ph.D. and Mary C. Edson, Ph.D. Tokyo Institute of Technology, Department of Value and Decision Science, Tokyo, Japan From March 6 through March 8, 2011, Kyoichi Kijima, Ph.D., Professor of Decision Systems Science, hosted the Fourth Annual Workshop and Open Symposium on Service Systems Science, sponsored by Research Institute of Science and Technology for Society (RISTEX), Japan Science and Technology (JST), at the Tokyo Institute of Technology. The purpose of the workshop and symposium was to bring together leading researchers, educators, and practitioners from North America, Europe, Asia, and Japan to share experiences and exchange expertise related to service science, management, and engineering (SSME). Through participation in the workshop, these leaders clarified important concepts, practices, and challenges in a collaborative venue using a systems science perspective. At the open symposium, distinguished speakers shared their experience from the frontiers of the field and their visions for the future of service systems science. The three days concluded with a panel discussion about state-of-the art approaches to advance the field of service systems science. This paper presents a summary of the workshop proceedings and shares ideas about next steps in the development of the field of service systems science. One of the goals of the workshop and symposium was to induce different perspectives from Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) in the field of service systems science. Distinguished speakers included Foong Sew Bun, IBM Distinguished Engineer and Chief Technology Officer (Singapore); Louis E. Freund, Ph.D., Charles W. Davidson Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering at San Jose State University (California, USA); Colin Harrison, Ph.D., Distinguished Engineer at IBM Enterprises Initiatives (Armonk, New York, USA); David Ing (IBM Marketing Scientist, Toronto, Canada) for Waldemar Karwowski, Ph.D., Professor and Chair Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida (Orlando, USA); Naoki Saito, Director, RISTEX, JST (Tokyo, Japan); Yuriko Sawatani, Fellow at RISTEX, JST (Tokyo, Japan); Marja Toivonen, Ph.D., Director, Adjunct Professor BIT Research Centre, Aalto University, School of Science and Technology (Finland); and Stephen L, Vargo, Ph.D., Shidler Distinguished Professor of Marketing at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (Honolulu, USA). Kyoichi Kijima facilitated the panel discussion which included Hiroshi Deguchi, Ph.D., Professor and Director of the Center for Agent-Based Social Systems Sciences at Tokyo Institute of Technology (Japan); David Ing (IBM Marketing Scientist, Toronto, Canada); and Gary S. Metcalf, Ph.D., President InterConnections, LLC (USA). Other participants included Anne Denuziere from Laboratoire de Chimie Analytique (Lyon, France), Kazuyochi Hidaka, Ph.D., from Tokyo Institute of Technology (Japan), Henri Hietala from Nordic Healthcare Group (Helsinki, Finland), Mayumi Itakura, Ph.D. from IBM (Kanagawa, Japan), Hironobu Matsushita from Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology (Japan), 1 SERVICE SYSTEMS SCIENCE AT TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Michael Norton, Ph.D., from Shinshu University, Santi Novani from Tokyo Institute of Technology, Minni Sarkka from Aalto University (Finland), Takao Terano from Tokyo Institute of Technology, Jennifer Wilby, Ph.D., from University of Hull (Kingston, UK), and Katsushi Yamashita from IBM (Japan). Kyoichi Kijima opened the intensive workshop on Sunday morning by introducing David Ing, Gary Metcalf, and Jennifer Wilby and outlining the design of the workshop. A key objective of the workshop was stimulation of shared ideas and collaboration that would leverage the connection between systems science, systems engineering, and service science. David Ing summarized three types of conversations as 1.) Orientation – based on generative dialogue (Banathy, Bohm), 2.) Possibilities – based on inquiring systems (Churchman, Singer), and 3.) Action – based on commitments (Flores, Winograd). Participants in these conversations had different roles as core members who present current research, facilitators who guide inquiry synthesis that incorporates content, and contributors who ask questions and provoke ideas. The basic format for presentations during the two days of the workshop entailed each SME answering an introductory question to provide orientation and to generate dialogue, a slide presentation of their research focus to stimulate inquiry for possibilities, and comments for synthesis and possible action. The introductory questions included the following: a.) What do you are about in service science, b.)Why is it important to you, and c.) Why did you decide to attend this meeting? Presenters were grouped into clusters of three with a facilitator who concluded each group with a collective integration of emergent ideas from the three presentations. At the conclusion of the second day of the workshop, moderators from each group that had presented facilitated reflection clusters that contemplated implications of what had just been heard and seen. Two questions guided the dialogue: 1.) What new themes have you synthesized as a result of the workshop, and 2.) What might we do with this joint learning? The following section summarizes some of the core ideas shared by each SME during the workshop. PRESENTATIONS – FIRST GROUP Colin Harrison is a storyteller whose goal is to help people understand what is going on in an emerging area with direct impact on their lives – smarter cities. His connection to service science is through Jim Spohrer (IBM Almaden). Dr. Harrison believes it is important to build a structure for systems science. His presentation focused on ten years of development of the concept of smarter cities, which emerged from an IBM Innovation Jam. Energy and the environment also emerged as pivotal issues that will drive future urban planning, architectural design, and community dynamics. Comments from participants identified the smarter cities model as an activity-based, hierarchical approach based on social construction. Inquiries from the participants explored how to adapt the model for cultural considerations, as well as ethical implications. Foong Sew Bun is also familiar with Jim Spohrer’s work and applies it at IBM Singapore. Based on his experience in Singapore, Sew Bun believes that the smarter cities approach will address complex issues in urban planning by more clearly identifying a city’s agenda and tackling its toughest problems. Sew Bun believes academia and industry share common interest in these challenges. His slide presentation was a case study of Singapore as a model for smarter cities 2 SERVICE SYSTEMS SCIENCE AT TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY with a vision of the Island State as a “gracious city.” Moving beyond silo thinking is fundamental in making this vision and model work. As a specific example of Dr. Harrison’s model, Singapore presents some intriguing possibilities for sustainability, energy, the environment, and community development. Mayumi Itakura believes that huge, complex problems need both scientific and holistic approaches to address human issues from different perspectives. Her presentation focused on designing a smarter planet resulting in higher efficiency, productivity, and responsiveness. She sees the smarter planet develop from focus on value, exploitation of opportunities, and responding with speed. Application of ideas from service science, management, and engineering (SSME) provides the foundation for her conceptualization of services as theatre. The metaphorical reference was one of many throughout the remainder of the workshop. The introduction of metaphor highlighted the need for development of a service science language, perhaps based upon science, engineering, management, and social systems science (e.g. SSME, SSM). EMERGENT IDEAS – FIRST GROUP The first three presentations initiated dialogue about developing shared meaning, language, models, and metaphors for a service systems science discipline. Some thought provoking questions emerged from the dialogue such as: Where do people fit into these processes? What is the definition of smart? What is the definition of sustainable? Participants identified the need for community involvement for the development of a smart city, especially with the goal of continuous improvement. A full cycle approach including education and employment was suggested, encompassing the role of social media and ethical implications for privacy (i.e. behavioral tracking of service usage). PRESENTATIONS – SECOND GROUP Jennifer Wilby, Ph.D., is interested in the relationship between Systems of Systems Methodologies (SOSM) and service systems science. SOSM (Jackson, Flood, Keys) provides a framework for examining perceived system behavior (i.e. what the system does and what it could do) and observing isomorphies between disciplines. The process of SOSM supports the emergence of isomorphies and other systemic principles (Boulding, 1956) within an analytical context that provides for the problem of using the wrong level of analysis and discipline to inquire into or solve problems at another level. In other words, SOSM can be a useful framework to avoid inappropriate and inaccurate application of isomorphic properties to transfer theory and practice into a new discipline. Participants appreciated this issue, especially in the application

Load more